Eight Thousand Years of Civilization ...gone

[Traianvs]

Originally posted by SpencerH
Its so amusing to me that a bunch of archeology fanatics know more about the security situation in Baghdad than the commanders and troops on the ground. Personally, I wouldnt have given one more American or Iraqi life to protect those museums and I'm willing to bet more than one life would have been lost in the chaos.

You still don't get it. The Americans defend the ministry of defense, oil and whatever that's important to the US government, but they might as well protected the hospitals, museums and similar locations without having to risk lives. Just letting them guard the places would be enough! Professionals or simple looters, none of them would be silly enough to take on a troop of heavily armed marines.

You know I could say just the same... Personally I wouldn't have given one more American or Iraqi life to protect those ministries and I'm willing to bet more than one life would have been lost in the chaos.


However, as far as I know, no soldiers were killed during the protection of those locations as looters only loot when it's made possible for them to loot, that's why nobody looted when Saddam was still in power . Easy enough right?

[SpencerH]

Originally posted by Sloth

Quite a lucid argument, more than I normally get.








For those that didnt understand; yes that was sarcasm.

[Traianvs]

Originally posted by SpencerH


Quite a lucid argument, more than I normally get.








For those that didnt understand; yes that was sarcasm.

What's wrong with bein an archaeology fanatic.. you war fanatics get all the fun, when are you doing something for us then

[SpencerH]

Originally posted by Trajanus

You still don't get it. The Americans defend the ministry of defense, oil and whatever that's important to the US government,

Gee thats a surprise. Did you figure we fought (and are still fighting) a war for whats important to archeologists?

but they might as well protected the hospitals, museums and similar locations without having to risk lives.

Any soldier standing guard in a hostile city is at risk. You may not have noticed, but american forces are still under fire in and around Baghdad.

Just letting them guard the places would be enough! Professionals or simple looters, none of them would be silly enough to take on a troop of heavily armed marines.

Yeah there's no way a bunch of somali's with AK-47's would take on the american army.

However, as far as I know, no soldiers were killed during the protection of those locations as looters only loot when it's made possible for them to loot, that's why nobody looted when Saddam was still in power . Easy enough right?

Good we'll send you over and you can stand post. There's no risk, right!

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by SpencerH
Any soldier standing guard in a hostile city is at risk. You may not have noticed, but american forces are still under fire in and around Baghdad.

But they have been guarding the US, UK, Aussie, and probably some other embassies.

So what's the big excuse?

[gsmoove23]

Hey, as a change of subject, I heard recently on an NPR report (radio, no link) that some Iraqi electrical engineers are claiming that it was the US who cut electricity before Baghdad fell. Supposedly, they say, the Americans dropped fiberglass dust on the generators or something which would have shorted out the equipment. The reporter said that this was the same technique used in Bosnia? Never heard of this before, has anyone? I've been looking for a story of it in print with no luck.

[SpencerH]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger

But they have been guarding the US, UK, Aussie, and probably some other embassies.

So what's the big excuse?

Do they need an excuse to guard their own territory and other important sites rather than a museum a few days after entering a hostile city of 5M? Get a grip!

[Oerdin]

Dropping aluminium stripes does sort out electrical generators and the US does use that technique. I have no idea if it occured in this case but it is possible.

[SpencerH]

The americans denied any direct responsibility for the power shutdown (when it happened) but did suggest that it could have been downed lines, transformers, etc from a nearby explosion targetting something else. That argument does makes sense in the light of the earlier targetted strikes that clearly did not take out the power grid but its also possible that strategic goals changed. Its interesting to note that the power went out in Baghdad not long after the govt was taking heat for not putting Iraqi TV off the air. They tried bombing one or two buildings but that didnt work for long. The next day the power went out which definitely put an end to the Iraqi propoganda which probably helped the american takeover of Baghdad.

[Traianvs]

Originally posted by SpencerH


Gee thats a surprise. Did you figure we fought (and are still fighting) a war for whats important to archeologists?



Any soldier standing guard in a hostile city is at risk. You may not have noticed, but american forces are still under fire in and around Baghdad.



Yeah there's no way a bunch of somali's with AK-47's would take on the american army.



Good we'll send you over and you can stand post. There's no risk, right!

What lame answers are these... If you get lame then I go lame as well..

-I'm not the one who started this war, I'm not the one who let Iraqis simply plunder the museum without any trouble, and I'm certainly not a soldier, so as to why I would go up there is kinda puzzling for me, Belgium is not at war anyway. I've also never shot a gun or any of the kind (You see what dorky things you are saying? perhaps now you understand)


-About the Somalis.. well the Somalis were not museum looters you know, perhaps you didn't know, but they were actually troops of a Somali Warlord!!! So first thing you need to know is: a soldiers kills people and fires guns, a looter on the other hand is trying to obtain valuable objects and usually won't fire guns, I've never seen a museum plunderer that wields guns anyway. Secondly, in Mogadishu, the Americans were seriously outnumbered, on top of that the Somalis had terrain advantage and the Americans were attacking, which is always harder than defending as you have to lure your enemies out to shoot them. Now here, the looters are "attacking" and if they DO have guns, would they do that against a 300,000 numbering force with the best weapons in the world etc etc??

I don't think so

-A soldier standing guard may be at risk, but I never said they would have to stand wide open to enemy fire, standing in the hallway blocking all entrances would do the trick, also check my previous point.


-Last thing: Sure we're not waging a war for archaeologists on the contrary, all a war can do is damage things (and that's what these gulf wars have done to ancient sites and now, this museum as well). Weird that you think I don't know that.


What a lame discussion man, bring up some real arguments, or give up. You're wrong and you know it.

[yavoon]

traj just to be sure, u do realize it was theft right? cuz it still sounds like u think a bunch of wild iraqis carrying pitchforks took everything.

[gunkulator]

It's still my opinion that if Iraq comes out of this thing with a better gov't, then that's worth the price of every single old doodad in that museum. I find it ironic that people are complaining that civilization is gone whilst ignoring the possibility that this is a pivotal moment for a nation to throw off its barbarian past and embrace a more civilized future.

But then again, it's always far easier to biatch and focus on the negative.

[Ned]

gunkulator, it is ironic, given the lawless nature of Saddam's regime, that the concept of the rule of law originated in Mesopotamia with Hammarabi's code. If Hammarabi were judging current events, and let us hope that he is, I believe that he would also agree that the restoration of the rule of law to his people is worth the loss into private hands of the tablets upon which his code was written.

[Dis]

*yawn*

I don't give a flying ****.

Who's to say goverments should have all rights to these items anyways?

the artifacts should belong to the people. They can do whatever they want with them. I can care less.

[The Mad Monk]

DISS!!!

Welcome back, we missed ya!

[DRoseDARs]

Welcome back from the ether, Diss.

This isn't about 'the government' owning the artifacts. These were taken from educational institutions that are free from political or 'idiotically-illogical' ideals. There was a failing by 'the government' in protecting these institutions from those that didn't know what they were doing...

...and those that did.

'The people' need a place for these items to be stored and displayed for the public. That's why we have museums.

[Dis]

eventually they will end up there. and the civilians will make a buck in the process.

[DRoseDARs]

But so many won't be recovered in all likelyhood. And so many never even made it out the door before they were destroyed.

The whole point of this thread, I guess, is that this didn't need to happen in the first place. Iraqi looters wouldn't have f*cked with coalition soldiers, even small contingents, and professional thieves would have gotten their f*cking heads blown off by said contingents. The hospitals (most importantly), the universities (second in importance), and the museum(s) and librarie(s) all could have been protected.

This didn't need to happen in the first place...